Argentinian Catholic journalist José María Poirier explains that the Pope is condemning an economy that is insensitive to those on the margins, not the free market.

BUENOS AIRES — José María Poirier is an Argentine journalist and has been the director of the Catholic magazine Criterio since 1996. He first met Father Jorge Bergoglio when the priest was the superior of the Jesuits in Argentina. The journalist later interviewed him several times when he served as archbishop of Buenos Aires.

Poirier authored the introduction of the book On Heaven and Earth, a series of dialogues between then-Cardinal Bergoglio and Rabbi Abraham Skorka. In the book Francis, Our Brother, Our Friend, journalist Alejandro Bermudez interviewed Poirier about his longtime coverage of the current Pope. And, recently, for the Register, Bermudez asked Poirier about Pope Francis’ views on economics, as outlined in the apostolic exhortation Evangelii Gaudium.

In the United States, a debate has broken out over the statements Pope Francis has made regarding the injustice in today’s economic systems.

I think it is worth noting that in the apostolic exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, the Pope writes that he is not an expert on political, social, economic and other issues. That is to say, although later he explicitly addresses them, he offers the qualification that he himself is not an expert on economic, political and social issues.

What drives him to make some very strong statements is, in part, his adherence to the Church’s social doctrine in the historical sense; and secondly, his belonging to the Latin-American world. This could already be seen, for example, in the document approved by the Latin-American bishops in 2007, at their meeting in Aparecida, which was drafted under his leadership, but also fundamentally in his pastoral experience.

Over the years, when he was archbishop of Buenos Aires, then-Cardinal Bergoglio was particularly dedicated to those most in need and had a great desire for justice and non-exclusion for people. Consequently, when he says that the youngest do not have a future and that society has no interest in the elderly, in some way he is denouncing what has been called “savage capitalism” or an economy without a human face, and that is what angers him and what he is confronting.

The Pope caused surprise in economic and academic circles with some of his statements in the exhortation, not only in the United States, but in Latin America as well.

I think we need to understand in this regard that the Pope is not coming at this from a technical perspective, but, rather, with a prophetic outlook, in the sense that statesmen, economists, politicians and leaders have to find effective ways to more fully integrate those who are on the sidelines, as the Pope says, those who are left out in a society that is not even willing to acknowledge this tremendous injustice.

In any case, I think that some exceptions need to be made. For example, no one is oblivious to the fact that there is less poverty in the world than in past decades. It’s enough to just consider the phenomenon in Asia, in China and India and in so many other countries. And even the United States, which, despite its economic crisis, is a booming country that continues to offer opportunities; and Europe, which is also experiencing its own crisis, is a welfare society that has brought millions of people into the economic world. What I mean by this is that we cannot take this as a judgment about the system in itself, but, rather, about a certain marked insensitivity in political and economic leaders towards a huge number of citizens who are excluded from exercising their citizenship because of their economic and political marginalization.

Is the Pope condemning a specific economic system, such as the free market?

No. His approach to the economic system is understood better when it is compared with the way in which he condemns war in the specific case of Syria, and he writes the famous letter to President Vladimir Putin and in some way forces President Obama to reconsider his position regarding the conflict. The Pope was not offering a technical response, in a political sense. In fact, Syria is still experiencing a very complex crisis.

What he was saying was essentially three things: The first is that every war entails more injustice and innocent deaths; that every war is driven by economic interests, such as those of the manufacturers and vendors of arms; and that religion is obligated and all religions in general are obligated to raise their voices in support of peace. In other words, it is an ethical and religious message, not a technical message.

What is the Pope’s vision regarding the role of the state in promoting social justice?

There is a tendency in Latin America, from which the Pope is probably not immune either, to grant the state an exaggerated role in requiring the distribution of wealth. The weak point lies in the fact that the question of the creation of wealth has not been sufficiently expounded or studied in the framework of the Church’s social doctrine. This question is still pending. And the Pope has no intention of shutting down discussion on this, but, instead, he wants to open it.

Is the Pope opposed to the market economy?

We can’t draw this conclusion. Based on his experience in Argentina and in particular in Buenos Aires, it is clear that he has traditionally considered Marxist socialism an evil for society. But after the successive economic crises and those created by certain international banks, he has also warned of the need to condemn the so-called “speculative world,” the sector that does not create wealth, but instead engages in financial speculation.

This also emerges in part in Cardinal Bergoglio’s personality as a confrontation with the Argentinean government of the Kirchners, first that of Nestor Kirchner and later that of Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner. He was confronting a government whose policy was pseudo-progressive but that in reality allowed many officials and businessmen linked to the government to illicitly amass wealth and was unconcerned with inflation and the problem of poverty, which continues to be one of the most serious problems in Argentina — the lack of the creation of genuine jobs and exclusion.

It has been shown, for example, in recent worldwide reports on education in different countries that in Argentina, despite the political discourse, the quality of education has fallen greatly, which makes the idea of economic and political recovery impossible.

What does the Pope mean when he speaks of a Church of the poor and for the poor?

It’s a message related to the name he chose as pontiff. By choosing the name of the saint from Assisi, Francis, in some way, wants to distance himself from a bureaucratic Church, particularly in the Roman Curia, attached to certain ways of doing business or to an image of wealth.

I think that Francis knows what he means when he speaks about a poor Church that is for the poor, that he is confronting, internally, within the Catholic Church certain sectors that are very traditionalist and attached to the wielding of power and to the advantages of wealth. So Francis believes that the Church cannot have a voice that condemns injustice and that advocates fraternity, equality and equal opportunity for everyone, unless it is based on a testimony of austerity and transparency in the Church that allows her to have a voice that will be heard on the international stage.

And consequently, I think there are three main directives that he is pushing, which in some way he has inherited from his predecessor, Benedict XVI — although he could not find a way to implement them. These are: transparency in Vatican financial affairs; a call to austerity to all the cardinals, bishops and priests of the world; and zero tolerance for the scandals of sexual abuse by priests and religious.

I think these are three key elements in the internal reform that Francis is implementing, and, ultimately, it is an acknowledgement that the Church’s greatest concern should be for the victims of injustice and abuse and that only through a credible testimony can religion raise its voice in the social and political world.

Some believe that the Pope is proposing a total equivalency between fundamental moral issues such as the right to life of the unborn and the problems of social and economic injustices.

This confusion is cleared up when we understand that traditional Jesuit discernment distinguishes between principles and pastoral care, without separating them.

Regarding principles, Francis is a man faithful to the Tradition of the Church, both in the case of abortion, as well as in so many other issues of moral doctrine. The main difference, in any case, is his vast pastoral experience. In the exhortation, he speaks about a hierarchy of values, about an effort to understand the gradualness of moral doctrine. That is, while in principle, the errors and sins of men are condemned, a hand is always extended to the one who is wrong or to the sinner, because the Church’s role, according to Francis, consists in transmitting God’s message — the message of mercy — so that all men and women can have a chance to be better. I think that is an important aspect for understanding his message.

Comments

Honestly, Micha, economies can’t repent. Neither can governments. Businesses don’t repent, unless they are small and family owned. They don’t have a human soul. But individuals collectively can be selfish in their assumptions. They can think, government will help that person. I don’t need to. Government will provide health care, I don’t have to worry about my sick neighbor. Let’s get abortion euthanasia and contraception in the mix so we fix population, health care, ability to have free sex and unwanted children. Consumers can collectively be very selfish, clogging up the highways, malls at Christmas time and just plain engaging in a shopping addiction. They can be indifferent. Like the time CNN flew over my friend Mary’s house during Hurricane Katrina. She was on her roof, starving and dehydrating. They got some award winning shots of her struggling to stay on the roof. But did those individuals who worked for CNN and were in the helicopter, did they offer Mary one bottle of water? No. They were indifferent to her plight, excited to get good film footage of the disaster. No they were part of the economy that kills.

What about those Americans who worked for the IRS? How could they so unfairly target groups and businesses that did not agree with the president politically? How do you get up in the morning and go to work when you are auditing and terrifying innocent taxpayers who simply are pro-life, conservative, or pro-marriage? That’s what they did. Shame on those individuals working for the IRS who undertook to unfairly audit and deny charitable status to pro-life, pro-marriage groups.

Pope Francis did not condemn the free market, and really he was talking to all of us individually. He was saying get off your duff. So to the extent that people like to blame capitalism, socialism, evil hedge funds, for the economy that kills, they have missed the mark. We are all part of the economy that kills, and unless we live our faith, we will kill whether we realize it or not. God bless you. Susan Fox blogger at http://christsfaithfulwitness.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-pope-protestant-and-redemption-of.html

Posted by Micha Elyi on Wednesday, Jan 8, 2014 5:08 PM (EDT):

I disagree with Steven (10:09 PM). Despite Pope Francis’s inexactitude and any clumsiness in the translation of his words in Evangelii Gaudium, he was certainly not advocating the crude Puritanism that Steven rashly insists upon.

Steven’s remarks are little more than a shriek formed from undefined slogans such as (but not limited to) “global consumerist capitalism”, “free hand of the market”, and “a system of consumer goods”. Let’s see Steven reveal exactly what he means by capitalism in plain words without relying on any of Marx’s discredited claims. (Frankly, so many who rant about capitalism are in thrall to that moral monster—even if unwittingly.) I also challenge Steven to honestly point to one example of “the free hand of the market” for everywhere the market is in chains forged by State power. There is no free market in the wild, it only exists in economic textbooks and in the heads of Marxian critics of natural liberty and human action. I also want to see Steven show how “consumer goods” can by themselves form “a system”, being that so many of them are inanimate or intangible.

Finally, of Steven and all those commenters here who reject trade with our distant neighbors, I ask them to reveal their preferred alternative. Do they advocate wars of conquest (the pre-Christian Roman model)? Do they prefer slavery (another pre-Christian model)? Or do they wish to impose upon all of us some autarkic, isolationist, totally self-sufficient existence (a model that not even the horrible North Korean regime can achieve)?

In closing, I note that Pope Francis did not mention capitalism even once in Evangelii Gaudium but he did use the word joy over 50 times. So I must ask why are so many of those who claim to think so highly of this pope so gloomily obsessive over capitalism (whatever they conceive it to be, if they have a clear conception of it at all) and so joyless?

Well, Steven as a conservative capitalist, I agree with you 100 percent. To lift the boat of capitalism, LIVE YOUR LIFE FULLY IN CHRSIT. Society will be transformed if we live our faith. But frankly, trying to drive in the shopping mess going on now, I am afraid the pope is right. We are lost in consumerism. God bless you. Susan Fox and Merry Christmas from http://www.christsfaithfulwitness.com

Posted by Steven on Monday, Dec 23, 2013 11:09 PM (EDT):

I think that Francis has been deliberately chosen by the Holy Spirit to confront the last remaining man-made millenialist system from the 20th century: global consumerist capitalism. It was the Marxists’ turn under JPII, the Nazis were crushed under force of arms long ago and only the ‘free hand of the market’, determinist as it is, remains.

Business and commerce itself is certainly not the problem, although many conservatives would have you believe that an attack on our current global system is itself socialist and anti-business. The problem is a system that kills the spirit and depersonalizes people through an inordinate emphasis on this world’s goods. Holy days have been replaced by money-making holidays, profit-making pornography remains even after conservatives rule the executive and legislative branches and a system of consumer goods, often produced by underpaid and exploited workers, remains in place even though its effects distract people from spiritual and family pursuits (is such a system so sacrosanct that conservatives can continue to refuse to see the need for any measures to control it?).

All of this is connected to a culture of death, albeit in a way that many cannot discern easily. People are viewed as commodities in such a world, and are subject to dismissal from this world’s stage when they are no longer useful, i.e. profitable (read abortion, euthanasia, denial of health benefits in a society perfectly able to save lives with proper insurance, sexual commodification, etc.).

Meanwhile conservatives insist that capitalism is the tide that lifts all boats, relying on an ‘end justifies the means philosophy’, just as other man-made systems now sitting on the ash heap of history did. It would indeed be tragic if conservatives prove themselves to be no different than the totalitarian apostates or liberal doctrinal dissenters of the last several decades.

Posted by Joe Mickey on Sunday, Dec 22, 2013 7:57 AM (EDT):

Why the need to rewrite the pope except that beliefs and powers are shaken… let his words be his words ... they do not need to be rewritten… nor do single sentences by the pope need to be redefined in long paragraphs.. he said what he said… that is enough

I read the Gospel of Joy, and it is hard to pin down exactly what he was saying about economics, except that we can’t rely on it to help the poor and the downtrodden, including unborn babies, old people in nursing homes, prisoners and homeless people. We are called to be the hands and feet of Christ to the world. Not the government, not the social agency. I have a friend who was in Hurricane Katrina on her roof. CNN filmed her struggling on her roof in the storm, and ran that picture over and over again on television. But my friend, who was on TV, told me that CNN helicopter came over head many times, and THEY WOULD NOT DROP HER ONE BOTTLE OF WATER. That is the Pope’s “Economy that kills.” Total indifference to human life. And in our case it was a major liberal media outlet that killed in a sin of omission. So get off your duff. That’s what the pope is talking about and go help someone. God bless you. Susan Fox http://www.christsfaithfulwitness.com

Posted by Kathleen on Thursday, Dec 19, 2013 8:12 PM (EDT):

I so totally agree with Marcus who posted on Wednesday! I really feel sad that some on this blog resort to highly uncharitable comments. All of us are entitled to our opinion.

Posted by Marcus on Thursday, Dec 19, 2013 7:30 PM (EDT):

Posted by Ben: “Pope Francis is right on target. Banning abortion is akin to banning war. Naive leaders of the League of Nations banned war in 1928 in the Kellogg-Briand Act. “
Firstly, Pope Francis never spoke about banning abortion.

Secondly, when abortion was banned, there was a whole lot less (millions) abortions performed. The legalization of evil changes the perspectives of people and makes them think that evil is now a good. Laws are educative. It is a common argument of most pro-death people that “it must be okay because the law says so”. So while banning abortion will not completely eliminate it, there is a humongous difference in the number of murders of babies prior to the legalization of this evil and the practical genocide we see now.

It is ludicrous to think that economic prosperity for all will solve this problem. People kill their children because as Mother Theresa said: they want to live as they please.

Posted by D C on Thursday, Dec 19, 2013 4:57 PM (EDT):

Like some of the others, I am getting a little worn out by all of the guessing and need for explanation about what the Pope “really meant.” The fact that we have to have so many “experts” take a stab at interpretation just doesn’t seem right. (And yes, I’ve read some of his publications, and they are not very clear to this graduate degree educated layman. At this rate, we’re in for a long papal term…

Posted by Jo D on Thursday, Dec 19, 2013 3:27 PM (EDT):

It was sad to lose our dear Benedict and Pope Francis is a huge disappointment. I miss the dignity that was. I don’t want a Pope like the “guy next door”. I no longer read about what Pope Francis says or does as it seems he speaks first, thinks second ... then has to have someone explain what he really meant. Our Church has been confused enough with Vatican II interpretations - now we have to interpret the Pope?

Posted by Robert C on Thursday, Dec 19, 2013 2:35 PM (EDT):

Ben, it’s obvious from your comments that you haven’t read Evangelii Gaudium, Ayn Rand, or anything by any “anarcho capitalists.” In any case, I don’t really know what Ayn Rand (who was not an anarcho capitalist) has to do with my comment above (I never even mentioned her).
.
“f caring for the poor is socialist, then count Jesus and the saints in that number. Follow the Gospel of the living God.” So is Pope Francis the “living God”? If not, do I get to compare the things he says to the things said by the living God in the gospel, or is it the duty of a Catholic to switch off his brain whenever the sitting pope opens his mouth and presume that everything he says is in line with Gospel truth? In EG—which some of us read—Pope Francis talks about encouraging politicians and governments to solve some abstract, and vaguely defined problems with the so-called “free market.” As it turns out, every socialist system, ever, had the same idea. So you tell me what the difference is?
.
Or did I miss something? Is there a new definition of socialism that does not involve governmental regulation of the so-called “free market” in order to make everything just and equal? That’s not socialism? And tell me which part of the Gospel it is that Christ encourages governments and politicians to redistribute wealth and regulate the “free market” through force? How does governmental coercion work into the concept of charity which we derive from the Gospel? And when Christ gave Peter the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven, did he also say “by the way, I am giving you the authority to make bold pronouncements on subject matters which arise out a natural order that can’t be altered (such as economic law); and whatever you say, no matter how uninformed, will become ‘Gospel Truth.’ Pronounce away!”

Posted by Bridget Provost on Thursday, Dec 19, 2013 2:15 PM (EDT):

There is already enough disinformation and confusion and the left seizes on it and calls the Pope their own,they named him Man of the Year.I hope and pray for enlightenment, clarity, and universal truth no matter where in the world you come from.We have a president who comes out every day putting down traditional values and cramming socialism down our throats, it doesn’t work it has never worked.It leads to ever more destructive things. Do we need to be better Catholics, yes we do but it will not happen unless we remain true to our core values, the ones Jesus taught us and quite frankly I do not think there was any ambiguity in HIS words.I love how we are all talking about what the Pope said it’s wonderful, but I do not want this Pope to be turned into a cult figure. We should all pray for our new Pope that he says what he means and means what he says!

Posted by Andy on Thursday, Dec 19, 2013 1:07 PM (EDT):

The comments of many above fascinate me and befuddle me. I read the exhortation Evangelii Gaudium and found it not confusing. The pope is making a moral statement - a statement that says that the incredible income disparity seen around the world is the problem - that his disparity interferes with evangelization - that . He s pointing out clearly what has been part of Catholic Social teaching for manny, many years. It is a part that is often ignored or reduced to subsidiary only. Perhaps rather than look at what the Pope says through the eyes of a conservative America Catholic, look at what he says through the eyes of just a Catholic.

Posted by John C. on Thursday, Dec 19, 2013 12:12 PM (EDT):

For how much longer can we continue with “Well, what Francis meant was….”??
This is getting crazy, and the Church is weaker now than ever.
Progressivism at it’s worst…. And the “Spirit of Vatican II” wolves are loving it.
Pray for Holy Mother Church to get through this time of trial, since the Council

Posted by Ben in Maine on Thursday, Dec 19, 2013 7:59 AM (EDT):

Robert C, if caring for the poor is socialist, then count Jesus and the saints in that number. Follow the Gospel of the living God, not the theories of deceased atheists like Ayn Rand.

Posted by Ben in Maine on Thursday, Dec 19, 2013 7:55 AM (EDT):

Pope Francis is right on target. Banning abortion is akin to banning war. Naive leaders of the League of Nations banned war in 1928 in the Kellogg-Briand Act. What happened 11 years later? If you want to change something, you must address the root causes and offer viable alternatives. And being Pro-Life is not just a singular political issue; it is a spectrum of issues. Abortion is the flagship concern, but it is not the only one. Let us strive to create a truly Pro Life society! That is the message of the Church and the last three Popes

Posted by Ben in Maine on Thursday, Dec 19, 2013 7:44 AM (EDT):

This is a befuddling age indeed, when both conservative and liberal Catholics are in the Cafeteria line. Democrats worship their god Obama, and Republicans worship a pantheon of deities, especially the anarcho-capitalist atheist Ayn Rand. So many Catholics are enslaved to false gods and secular ideologies that only lead to Perdition.

Posted by JB on Thursday, Dec 19, 2013 4:58 AM (EDT):

Maybe Francis should just join the Tea Party. That would shut up most of his American critics. Or maybe some of his critics could begin to show some of the deference that is due to the Vicar of Christ(fat chance of that!). Every time the Holy Father opens his mouth a herd of ideologically-minded critics try to stick their feet in it.

Posted by Stemkowski on Thursday, Dec 19, 2013 1:03 AM (EDT):

It was said that Pope Benedict XVI intended to write after his resignation. I truly and profoundly hope that there will be guidance to be had from said writing, because we desperately, desperately need it in the wake of what we now have.

Posted by Howard on Wednesday, Dec 18, 2013 10:59 PM (EDT):

So a journalist has magisterial force as long as he’s Argentinian. Yeah, right.

Posted by Marcus on Wednesday, Dec 18, 2013 10:00 PM (EDT):

“In the exhortation, he speaks about a hierarchy of values, about an effort to understand the gradualness of moral doctrine. “

So in the hierarchy of values, where does killing an innocent human being lie? Where does social justice lie?

In saying that we should not emphasize evil of abortion, then to him it means that social justice is a more pressing problem.

But as I have written elsewhere, if we can visualize a society where mothers go to clinics and take their children there to be killed because it is an inconvenience, would we still think that so called poverty and preferential options for the poor trump this?

And yet that is precisely what is happening. Except that the dead babies cannot protest about the injustice that was done to them.

Pope Benedict got the real thrust of the problem correct. It resides not in unjust systems but in the will and in the intellect. The battle field is the field of information which consistently being hijacked by the evil secular media and sad to say that the Pope has helped their cause even if it can claimed that they have been misrepresenting what he said.

It is no wonder that the oldest gay rights movement has declared him Person of the Year.

Posted by R on Wednesday, Dec 18, 2013 9:51 PM (EDT):

SO WHY DIDN’T THE POPE SAY WHAT YOU SAID. AMBIGUITY KEEPS THE MASSES IGNORANT. YOU CAN KEEP THE PEOPLE ECONOMICALLY OPPRESSED WHILE THEY FIGHT FOR THE SYSTEM THAT KEEPS THEM OPPRESSED.

Posted by Richard J on Wednesday, Dec 18, 2013 8:39 PM (EDT):

So, what you are saying is that Pope Francis brought his purely Latin American view to the Vatican and is trying to cram the rest of the world into his narrow, uninformed model of reality. That his lack of technical expertise is the excuse for his condemnation of Catholics across the world…perhaps he should connect with us before he condems us. Is Liberation Theology on its way back too? He has lost all credibility with me to speak on any matters beyond faith.

Posted by adolfo on Wednesday, Dec 18, 2013 7:57 PM (EDT):

Yes, of course. He surely did not mean what he plainly said and addressed to the entire Church. He was, rather, condemning a very particular practice found in one small corner of the Church. That makes MUCh more sense. Phew!

Posted by Robert C on Wednesday, Dec 18, 2013 5:53 PM (EDT):

“[T]he Pope writes that he is not an expert on political, social, economic and other issues.” That’s obvious. But, then, why start blasting away on subjects that fundamentally relate to economics and politics; and which require a more sophisticated understanding of these subjects than that which Pope Francis has? Can we expect him to start giving recommendations relating to physical sciences?
.
“[H]e is denouncing what has been called ‘savage capitalism’ or an economy without a human face.” Meaning, what? These are the kind of rhetorical statements that drive me totally bonkers. Is it just that he is against individuals treating the poor and elderly without dignity? Ok, aren’t we all? Now, explain why Francis specifically cites the “free market” as the primary and ultimate source of this abuse? “[S]avage capitalism” is just a meaningless phrase intended to mystify and obscure the whole conversation. Otherwise, define “civilized” or “humane” capitalism, please.
.
“[W]e need to understand in this regard that the Pope is not coming at this from a technical perspective, but, rather, with a prophetic outlook, in the sense that statesmen, economists, politicians and leaders have to find effective ways to more fully integrate those who are on the sidelines.” Oh, GOOD! We need more laws and regulations, and perhaps a couple of really snazzy political policies. Like a “Five Year Plan” to end poverty! The thing is, those of us who are criticizing Francis’ economics already figured this was where he was coming from, since he says so write there in the letter when he calls on politicians and world governments to come together and solve all the horrors of the free market. Because relying on governments and politicians to bring about peace and justice via market regulation is a tried and true approach that works every time!
.
“[N]o one is oblivious to the fact that there is less poverty in the world than in past decades…[but]…we cannot take this as a judgment about the system in itself.” (1) Francis must be oblivious to this when he says in sections 53-54 that the free market system’s ability to alleviate poverty has not been “confirmed by the facts.” (2) Francis’ [false] conclusion that the facts do not confirm the effectiveness of the market system in alleviating poverty is in itself a judgment about the system. This is a lot of doublespeak.
.
“Is the Pope condemning a specific economic system, such as the free market? No.” …yet he specifically names the “free market.”
.
“[A]fter the successive economic crises and those created by certain international banks, he has also warned of the need to condemn the so-called ‘speculative world,’ the sector that does not create wealth, but instead engages in financial speculation.” And yet, he never refers to central banks, and never draws the connection between the central banks and the politicians and governments that he expressly calls on to righteously reform the whole system that he condemning! The central banks = the governments and politicians. They are ostensibly one in the same. So how exactly is Francis’ suggestion to reign in the free market through the good graces of our politicians supposed to work? Shall our politicians just give up being evil and despicable and morph into angelic beings?
.
I respect Pope Francis, and I don’t like having to criticize the Holy Father. But I love the Church too much to be swayed by this personality cult where even false and uninformed commentary by the pope is dressed up to be something that it’s not. This whole article could have began and ended with the following statement: “[T]he Pope … is not an expert on political, social, economic and other issues.” PRECISELY. Which is why he should exercise restraint and HUMILITY when it comes to matters that our beyond his expertise (and more importantly, beyond his moral authority as Vicar of Christ). Instead, he makes grand presumptions about complex economic matters, causes masses confusion, and then an army of defenders and apologists scramble to call everyone who disagrees with him a dissenter from—what are they calling it?—ah yea, “traditional Catholic Social Teachings.”
.
I forgot about that time “Catholic Social Teaching” condemned free markets and embraced socialism.
.
Pope Francis might as well write a letter condemning the injustices and inequality stemming from the rules of physics or gravity. I’m sure if he did, we’d hear from an echo-chamber of apologists that Pope Francis is just expounding “traditional Catholic Gravity Teaching!”

Posted by John on Wednesday, Dec 18, 2013 5:53 PM (EDT):

It is becoming a pattern, the pope talks, or in this case writes, and then it has to be explained what he really meant. The state’s role in promoting social justice should be to empower citizens to be able to do charity. This happens with low taxes and state incentives to do charity as opposed to the giant and ever growing nanny state of today. The state actually destroys not only much of the ability to do charity but develops self-interested structures in the business of charity at both a governmental and non-governmental level. Then of course we have Germany where you must pay to be Catholic via taxes, here the Church has morphed into a money sucking vampire of pay or else. Catholic institutions should be free of coerced tax money and government interference, and Catholic people should be free of greedy pay or else policies. Francis should start by freeing Germany of the taxes that drive people out of the church. People should be enabled and inspired to give, not have an ecclesial gun held to their heads. Currently no less than 1/6 of our family income is taken by school and county taxes, this does not count sales taxes, usage fees, income taxes, social security taxes and on and on. They take so much that one can’t afford a dentist or to maintain a home, and one must shop for food carefully. My income is not inadequate, my taxes are too high and I don’t even live in Germany. The state is not my church, the exaggeration of the role of the state is gigantically out of hand. It breeds more state employees and more state retirement of them and on and on, the people are merely slaves of a corrupt system that self-perpetuates special interests which move money around according to the puppet masters. It is corrupt, sick, and doomed. Where I live 1 in 3 is a government employee so he is employed and paid for by the other two who usually have a lower wage and no retirement - it is sick. This corruption is in government and especially education where students are suckered into giant debt to feed the higher education monster, they are just slaves to the system. The only “industries” growing are the sickness and death trade and the elite education system. There is no possibility of social justice in the system today, none. These are the same systems that kill children in the womb, they kill social justice all the time! Even their heroes like Mandella - baby killing is fine by him. The pope needs to get the state out of charity and off the backs of the people if he wants justice, social or otherwise.

Posted by Kathleen on Wednesday, Dec 18, 2013 5:46 PM (EDT):

It is upsetting for me that after every commentary or written piece by the Pope, people are rushing to explain what he said. He is not an unintelligent man, he should be more than capable of explicitly saying what he means. I take very little relieve from all the explanations that are given on his behalf.

Posted by Case Roland on Wednesday, Dec 18, 2013 2:00 PM (EDT):

How about an organic Christian solution for our failing economy? In his ground breaking book Return to Order, which is free on Amazon kindle, John Horvat II, shows how unrestrained capitalism and socialism are morally bankrupt.

Organic Christian principles answer the highest aspirations of our souls, and in such a society, economic growth is a sub-product of moral excellence and development. Honor, not money, rule.

Posted by Andy on Wednesday, Dec 18, 2013 1:27 PM (EDT):

Congratulations Register! Another piece on reassuring conservative Catholics that the Pope may be safely ignored on economic issues!

Posted by Carolyn C on Wednesday, Dec 18, 2013 1:26 PM (EDT):

“What Francis meant..” I don’t ever remember Catholic papers constantly saying what previous popes “really meant.” Does the Vatican know how much confusion is sown every time Francis speaks?

Join the Discussion

We encourage a lively and honest discussion of our content. We ask that charity guide your words.
By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our discussion guidelines.
Comments are published at our discretion. We won’t publish comments that lack charity, are off topic, or are more than 400 words.
Thank you for keeping this forum thoughtful and respectful.